Tang Dong-Dong, Li Chao, Peng Dang-Wei, Zhang Xian-Sheng
Department of Urology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Anhui Medical University, Hefei, China.
Reproductive Medicine Center, The First Affiliated Hospital of Anhui Medical University, Hefei, China.
Asian J Androl. 2018 Jan-Feb;20(1):19-23. doi: 10.4103/aja.aja_9_17.
The premature ejaculation diagnostic tool (PEDT) is a brief diagnostic measure to assess premature ejaculation (PE). However, there is insufficient evidence regarding its validity in the new evidence-based-defined PE. This study was performed to evaluate the validity of PEDT and its association with IIEF-15 in different types of evidence-based-defined PE. From June 2015 to January 2016, a total of 260 men complaining of PE and defined as lifelong PE (LPE)/acquired PE (APE) according to the evidence-based definition from Andrology Clinic of the First Affiliated Hospital of Anhui Medical University, along with 104 male healthy controls without PE from a medical examination center, were enrolled in this study. All individuals completed questionnaires including demographics, medical and sexual history, as well as PEDT and IIEF-15. After statistical analysis, it was found that men with PE reported higher PEDT scores (14.28 ± 3.05) and lower IIEF-15 (41.26 ± 8.20) than men without PE (PEDT: 5.32 ± 3.42, IIEF-15: 52.66 ± 6.86, P < 0.001 for both). It was suggested that a score of ≥9 indicated PE in both LPE and APE by sensitivity and specificity analyses (sensitivity: 0.875, 0.913; specificity: 0.865, 0.865, respectively). In addition, IIEF-15 were higher in men with LPE (42.64 ± 8.11) than APE (39.43 ± 7.84, P < 0.001). After adjusting for age, IIEF-15 was negatively related to PEDT in men with LPE (adjust r = -0.225, P < 0.001) and APE (adjust r = -0.378, P < 0.001). In this study, we concluded that PEDT was valid in the diagnosis of evidenced-based-defined PE. Furthermore, IIEF-15 was negatively related to PEDT in men with different types of PE.
早泄诊断工具(PEDT)是一种用于评估早泄(PE)的简短诊断方法。然而,关于其在新的循证定义的早泄中的有效性,证据并不充分。本研究旨在评估PEDT的有效性及其在不同类型的循证定义的早泄中与国际勃起功能指数-15(IIEF-15)的关联。2015年6月至2016年1月,共有260名主诉早泄的男性根据安徽医科大学第一附属医院男科门诊的循证定义被诊断为终身性早泄(LPE)/获得性早泄(APE),以及104名来自体检中心的无早泄的男性健康对照者纳入本研究。所有个体均完成了包括人口统计学、病史和性史以及PEDT和IIEF-15的问卷调查。经过统计分析,发现早泄男性的PEDT得分(14.28±3.05)高于无早泄男性(PEDT:5.32±3.42,P<0.001),而IIEF-15得分(41.26±8.20)低于无早泄男性(IIEF-15:52.66±6.86,P<0.001)。敏感性和特异性分析表明,在LPE和APE中,PEDT得分≥9分均提示早泄(敏感性分别为0.875、0.913;特异性分别为0.865、0.865)。此外,LPE男性的IIEF-15得分(42.64±8.11)高于APE男性(39.43±7.84,P<0.001)。在调整年龄后,LPE男性(调整r=-0.225,P<0.001)和APE男性(调整r=-0.378,P<0.001)的IIEF-15与PEDT呈负相关。在本研究中,我们得出结论,PEDT在循证定义的早泄诊断中是有效的。此外,在不同类型的早泄男性中,IIEF-15与PEDT呈负相关。